Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Another Hoka question
Quote | Reply
This year I am moving from halves to a full. I am a heavier guy (190) that has fought several lower leg/Ankle issues the past couple of years. My thought was to move toward a Hoka shoe for my long runs. After several trials I decided on the Bondi 4. I ran 15 in them and felt really good at first but developed knee pain around mile 12. The next two days I was very sore. Like the first time you did squats sore. I have never really been sore like this from running. Is this normal or am I having to work harder in the Hokas? I normally run in Adrenalines 14 or 16's
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [brungart] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
IMO Hoka's have an adjustment period just like Newtons or any other shoe you are not accustomed to. I ran in Newtons for 6 years and tried Hoka's earlier this year. Ever since I've had heel pain after every run. There's something about either the shape of the insole or the rocker mechanism they use that seems to put a lot of stress on my heels. Could be something similar happening in your situation.
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [brungart] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Hokas in general tend to be a bit on the heavy side, for most of their models. That might be the cause of your pain. I run in their Clifton 2's. Much lighter with plenty of cushion. Perhaps it's just legs/knees transitioning to a different shoe? I felt similar discomfort, albeit in my calf muscles, when trying out Newtons for the first time. Some times even minor changes to shoe weight and heel/toe off set can take some time to get use to. I love my Hokas. I've gone through 3 pairs of Cliftons and have run 3 marathons and one half ironman in them with no problem.
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [franceschi710] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I switched to Hoka Clifton last year and I am a bigger guy (185-190 range). I had about a 3 month adjustment period where I was getting some weird pains. I was only doing shorter runs, <6 miles, in them until the pain subsided. Now I am fine and absolutely love them. Did my first full in them 5 weeks ago and no pain at all.
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [brungart] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm the same size (o.k. closer to 195) never had any issues switching from Asics Kayano to Bondi's. Transitioned from Bondi to Clifton. Running has never been more enjoyable.

Correlation does not imply causation
Last edited by: stillrollin: Nov 24, 15 12:21
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [brungart] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
My experience is almost identical. I'm a long time Brooks Adrenaline wearer and experimented with HOKA recently. (I experimented mainly because of how the Adrenaline model 15s changed the sizing. I wear a size 13 and they don't make a 13.5 to offset how they changed the fit for the 15s. I would need to get a size 14 and that was simply way too big.)

I didn't have any issues with the HOKAs until I ramped up my mileage as I transitioned from triathlon season to heavier run focus 'off season'. I determined the move from a very supportive Adrenalines to a more neutral HOKA was allowing me to over-pronate and thus caused the knee pain. I ordered the Brooks Adrenaline GTS16s (they fixed the sizing issue with the 16s) and after about 2 weeks of easy running... The knee pain is gone. It's also worth mentioning that I run with PowerStep Pinnacle Gold inserts in my shoes.

The Bondis I wore were Bondi 3s. I also found that the Bondi 3s seem to wear much faster too. I loved the ride of the HOKAs but I'll stick with the Adrenalines going forward. (I'm on my 35th pair of Adrenalines.)
Last edited by: kirby116: Nov 24, 15 14:33
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [kirby116] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
your problem with the bondi 3, in my opinion, isn't that it's a neutral shoe. i moved from a long-time wearer of adrenalines (like you) to the bondi, but i could not run in the 3. it was too wide in the forefoot. i find the bondi to be even more structural for the overpronator (me) than the adrenaline. but it was the bondi b, the bondi 2, and the bondi 4 that worked. not the 3.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [brungart] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Why do you guys think I'm so sore?
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks for the information. I read similar reviews about the Bondi 3s. I actually raced my 'A' race (a 70.3) in the HOKA Clifton 2s and loved them for a race shoe. I'm think the Clifton's have less support than the Bondis but for a half IM they worked great. I'm not sure what I'll do with my next full distance race. My work-horse training shoes will probably be Brooks until I have a reason to change again.
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [ironshoe7] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ironshoe7 wrote:
IMO Hoka's have an adjustment period just like Newtons or any other shoe you are not accustomed to. I ran in Newtons for 6 years and tried Hoka's earlier this year. Ever since I've had heel pain after every run. There's something about either the shape of the insole or the rocker mechanism they use that seems to put a lot of stress on my heels. Could be something similar happening in your situation.



Nowhere near an accurate comparison. Newtons require a complete change in mechanics and foot striking, stride etc. Hoka's are just cushioned and ride slightly higher and don't require a change in mechanics at all and IMO don't have a break in period nearly as steep.

"I would definitely smell her seat after a century ride"
Rappstar wrote:
That might be the post of the year right there.
Last edited by: shivermetimbers: Nov 24, 15 14:57
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [shivermetimbers] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
shivermetimbers wrote:
ironshoe7 wrote:
IMO Hoka's have an adjustment period just like Newtons or any other shoe you are not accustomed to. I ran in Newtons for 6 years and tried Hoka's earlier this year. Ever since I've had heel pain after every run. There's something about either the shape of the insole or the rocker mechanism they use that seems to put a lot of stress on my heels. Could be something similar happening in your situation.



Nowhere near an accurate comparison. Newtons require a complete change in mechanics and foot striking, stride etc. Hoka's are just cushioned and ride slightly higher and don't require a change in mechanics at all and IMO don't have a break in period nearly as steep.

I switched to Hokas for long runs, tempo runs, anything other than rack work and Sprints really. I haven't had any injury, but I did notice that they do tend to need a break in time. As in YOU get used to the lift. (or atleast I had to!) I made some minor adjustments in my form. They are easy to sit back in your stride, so to speak. I love them, but at first I did notice that I found myself getting lazy and heel striking like crazy and I've always been a midfoot type of runner. I just paid more attention to my gait and corrected the strike. Now I can go much longer, much easier. I'm at 175lbs, and I love these goofy looking moon boots!
I think my Bondis are heavier than my Stinson Lites. I could be worng, but like another poster said, maybe the weight or ride height is an issue?
Good luck!
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [brungart] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
How many 15 mile runs had you done prior?
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [brungart] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Your Brooks have 12mm of drop. Your Hokas have 4mm of drop. Lower drop shoes can take stress off lower legs but that stress doesn't always just go away. My experience is that high drop shoes stress my lower legs and low drop shoes stress stress my quads and lower back.

My guess is that your quads are sore because your body has not properly adjusted to the mid/fore for running stride that a low drop shoe promotes. Perhaps you can try alternating shoes? I went from Acsis high drop shoes to Kinvara (4mm drop) over a 3 month period by slowing adding more runs in 4mm shoes over time.

In Cliftons now and am happy with the shoe.
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
your problem with the bondi 3, in my opinion, isn't that it's a neutral shoe. i moved from a long-time wearer of adrenalines (like you) to the bondi, but i could not run in the 3. it was too wide in the forefoot. i find the bondi to be even more structural for the overpronator (me) than the adrenaline. but it was the bondi b, the bondi 2, and the bondi 4 that worked. not the 3.

Like you I go way back on the Hoka bandwagon after switching from the Adrenaline to the original Bondi back in 2012. Love, love, loved those original Bondi's. Same thing for the Bondi 2's. The 3's however were just ok for me. They weren't terrible like others have experienced but I was never "in love" with them. I only kept using them because I missed my return date and I'm too cheap to completely ditch them. They finally got to their natural end of life (takes longer because I rotate them with other shoes - Conquest, Clifton and Stinson).

I recently acquired the 4's expecting to go back to that original "in love" feeling that I had with my first few pairs of Bondi's. Unfortunately, they just don't have quite that same feeling and my legs were pretty trashed after my first few runs in them. I'm going to keep giving them a try for a few weeks in hopes that they'll come around but I'll be keeping a close eye on my 60 day return window. As of right now I'm not confident enough in them to take them out longer runs like 20 milers. For those I'll be sticking with my Cliftons for the time being.
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [777] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
777 wrote:
shivermetimbers wrote:
ironshoe7 wrote:
IMO Hoka's have an adjustment period just like Newtons or any other shoe you are not accustomed to. I ran in Newtons for 6 years and tried Hoka's earlier this year. Ever since I've had heel pain after every run. There's something about either the shape of the insole or the rocker mechanism they use that seems to put a lot of stress on my heels. Could be something similar happening in your situation.



Nowhere near an accurate comparison. Newtons require a complete change in mechanics and foot striking, stride etc. Hoka's are just cushioned and ride slightly higher and don't require a change in mechanics at all and IMO don't have a break in period nearly as steep.


I switched to Hokas for long runs, tempo runs, anything other than rack work and Sprints really. I haven't had any injury, but I did notice that they do tend to need a break in time. As in YOU get used to the lift. (or atleast I had to!) I made some minor adjustments in my form. They are easy to sit back in your stride, so to speak. I love them, but at first I did notice that I found myself getting lazy and heel striking like crazy and I've always been a midfoot type of runner. I just paid more attention to my gait and corrected the strike. Now I can go much longer, much easier. I'm at 175lbs, and I love these goofy looking moon boots!
I think my Bondis are heavier than my Stinson Lites. I could be worng, but like another poster said, maybe the weight or ride height is an issue?
Good luck!

I have the opposite experience. Bondi and Cliftons encourage me to midfoot strike.
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [ironshoe7] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
anyone had issues with clifton 2? I wore first clifton and loved it but clifton 2 causes my the medial side of my foot to go numb. Real bummer consider how i have loved the clifton and bought 2 pairs of the clifton 2 hoping the next pair would fix the problem.

2024: Bevoman, Galveston, Alcatraz, Marble Falls, Santa Cruz
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [BBLOEHR] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BBLOEHR wrote:
anyone had issues with clifton 2? I wore first clifton and loved it but clifton 2 causes my the medial side of my foot to go numb. Real bummer consider how i have loved the clifton and bought 2 pairs of the clifton 2 hoping the next pair would fix the problem.

I find that the 2 is a little narrower than the 1, but I haven't had any issues. I prefer the 2 over the 1 because of the improved cushion around the ankle, and the insole improvement (doesn't slide forward like the 1). The only downside for the 2 is that it is heavier by nearly 1 oz.

"I would definitely smell her seat after a century ride"
Rappstar wrote:
That might be the post of the year right there.
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [shivermetimbers] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
shivermetimbers wrote:
BBLOEHR wrote:
anyone had issues with clifton 2? I wore first clifton and loved it but clifton 2 causes my the medial side of my foot to go numb. Real bummer consider how i have loved the clifton and bought 2 pairs of the clifton 2 hoping the next pair would fix the problem.


I find that the 2 is a little narrower than the 1, but I haven't had any issues. I prefer the 2 over the 1 because of the improved cushion around the ankle, and the insole improvement (doesn't slide forward like the 1). The only downside for the 2 is that it is heavier by nearly 1 oz.

yea those things are great agreed! To bad i can't wear the shoe otherwise.

2024: Bevoman, Galveston, Alcatraz, Marble Falls, Santa Cruz
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [brungart] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It's not likely to be a shoe weight issue as the Bondi 4 weighs less than the Adrenaline 16. The possibilities include the difference between a neutral shoe (Bondi), and a moderate stability shoe (Adrenaline). Depending on how much you overpronate, maybe you need the support of the Adrenaline. There is also the difference in drop, 4 with the Bondi and 12 with the Adrenaline. That difference will affect how your legs feel and would likely be magnified over the course of a long run...especially if you didn't go thru a transition period. Then there is the rocker profile of the Bondi which means there is less flex in the forefoot of the shoe compared to the Adrenaline. Some people have found the extra squish on impact causes them to push off more forcefully to maintain a certain pace. Others have found the higher stack height makes them adjust their mechanics slightly, often a higher lift of the knee. The thing is there are so many possibilities it would be difficult to determine what the cause of your pain is. You may want to go back to the Adrenaline and slowly transition to the Bondi by alternating. Also keep in mind that even though many people have success in a Hoka shoe, they are not for everyone.

Don

Tri-ing to have fun. Anything else is just a bonus!
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [brungart] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks all for the great information. Although it was pretty much a non starter due to massive blistering. I may try the constants again but just adjust to the really slowly this time.
Quote Reply
Re: Another Hoka question [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
your problem with the bondi 3, in my opinion, isn't that it's a neutral shoe. i moved from a long-time wearer of adrenalines (like you) to the bondi, but i could not run in the 3. it was too wide in the forefoot. i find the bondi to be even more structural for the overpronator (me) than the adrenaline. but it was the bondi b, the bondi 2, and the bondi 4 that worked. not the 3.

My situation sounds the same. I am an older guy who pronates, and have used Adrenalines for many years. I tried the Bondi 3 and my foot slopped around in the wide toe-box causing blisters. I am on my first pair of Bondi 4's now, and have never enjoyed a pair of running shoes this much.

My question is, what do you mean by the Bondi being "even more structural for the pronator"? I don't see any motion control in the shoe and I'm amazed that I'm not pronating like crazy and feeling it in my knees.
Quote Reply